Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Picaroni


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was del `'mikka (t) 01:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Picaroni
2 years old and still not notable. Not in top 100,000 pages, numerous google hits, however its impossible to tell how many actually relate to this website. Of note, the first 3 relate to this website on the first page of results. One is a forum message about it closing down for a bit, the other is this article There are 2 more hits further down, only pages with links to images hosted there. This is also a last name and obviously tainting the results. The 2nd page has only 3 results, the third page only a single result. "picaroni.com" only gives 41 results Crossmr 21:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, lacks proof of notability required by WP:WEB. Sandstein 21:19, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Picaroni lost its hosting service on August 26, 2005 due to excessive bandwidth usage, along with a majority of the pictures previously uploaded. The service was not restored until the May 23, 2006, and has not yet regained the Google-based notability it maintained before August 26, 2005. Approximately 11,400 web pages still mention, or link to Picaroni.com.   Zelaron 22:08, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
 * comment if and when it regains its alleged notability the page can be recreated. We don't create or keep articles on a subject if the notability cannot be established at the time of debate. Also recheck your google link. There are only 46 unique hits, thats why it peters out at page 6. --Crossmr 22:36, 10 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom.  OhNo itsJamie Talk 00:18, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, other similar sites such as Skyfolder and Fotki have their own articles, yet they are not in the top 100,000 Alexa pages either. Aston 22:47, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
 * articles have to stand on their own merit, you can't justify the existence of one article based on another. They may only exist because no one has put them up for deletion yet. For future reference fotki.com is 950th --Crossmr 00:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Users only two edits are on this AFD, very likely sock.-- Andeh 20:15, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete for reasons given by nominator and Sandstein. DVD+ R/W 22:54, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

comment its probably worth noting that the user Aston is brand new and their sole contributions are to this page. --Crossmr 00:10, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 *  AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks,--Crossmr 19:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Kimchi.sg 20:05, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't see evidence of notability. --Ed (Edgar181) 20:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Starionwolf 20:29, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - Nowhere near as popular as similar products. Wickethewok 20:31, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. &mdash; Khoikhoi 03:57, 13 June 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.